Skip to main content

How to Write a Healthiness Condition

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1945))

Abstract

This paper presents a technique called generic composition to provide a neat basis for different kinds of semantic compositions and various higher-order healthiness conditions appearing in a variety of semantic theories. The weak inverse of generic composition is defined. A completeness theorem shows that any predicate can be written in terms of generic composition and its weak inverse, and a number of algebraic laws are given to support reasoning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A. Abramsky, Semantics of interaction: an introduction to Game Semantics, Proc. of the 1996 CLiCS Summer School,ed. P. Dybjer and A. Pitts, 1–31, Cambridge Press, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  2. B. Alpern and F. B. Schneider, Defining liveness, Information Processing Letters, 21: 181–185, 1985.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. K. M. Chandy and J. Misra, Parallel Program Design: A Foundation, Addison-Wesley, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Y. Chen, Specification for reactive bulk-synchronous programming, Proc. 8th Euromicro Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Processing: 190–196, IEEE computer society press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Y. Chen, Formal Methods for Bulk-Synchronous Programming, DPhil. Thesis, Oxford University Computing Laboratory, to appear 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Y. Chen, Parallel composition via medium, Constructive Methods for Parallel Programming, ed. S. Gorlatch and C. Lengauer, in book series Advances in Computation: Theory and Practice, Nova Science Books and Journals, to appear 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  7. E. W. Dijkstra, Guarded commands, non-determinacy and the formal derivation of programs, Communications of the ACM, 18: 453–457, 1975.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. He Jifeng, K. Seidel and A. K. McIver, Probabilistic models for the guarded command language. Science of Computer Programming 28:171–192, 1997.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. E. C. R. Hehner, Predicative Programming I, II Communications of ACM, 27(6):593–593, 1984.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. C. A. R. Hoare, Programs are predicates. ed. J. C. Shepherdson and C. A. R. Hoare, Mathematical Logic and Programming Languages, 141–155, Prentice Hall, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  11. C. A. R. Hoare, Communicating Sequential Processes, Prentice Hall series in Computer Science, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  12. C. A. R. Hoare and J. He, The weakest prespecification I,II. Fundamenta Informatica, 9: 51–84, 217-252, 1986.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. C. A. R. Hoare et al. Laws of programming, Communications of the ACM, 30(8): 672–686, 1987.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. C. A. R. Hoare and J. He, Unifying Theories of Programming, Prentice Hall seriesin Computer Science, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Milner, Communication and Concurrency, Prentice Hall series in Computer Science, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  16. L. Lamport, A temporal logic of actions, ACM Transctions on Programming Languages and Systems, 16(3): 872–923, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. L. Lai and J. W. Sanders, A weakest-environment calculus for communicating processes, Proc. 4th Nordic Transputer Conference: Parallel Programming and Applications, ed. P. Fritzon and L. Finmo, 381–395, IOS Press, Ohmsha, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. S. Lecomber, Methods of BSP Programming, Oxford University ComputingLaboratory DPhil. thesis, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  19. R. D. Maddux, Fundamental study relation-algebraic semantics, Theoretical Computer Science, 160: 301–313, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. J. L. Peterson, Petri Net Theory and Modeling of Systems, Prentice Hall series in Computer Science, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  21. L. G. Valiant, A bridging model for parallel computation, Communications of the ACM, 33(8): 103–111, 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. J. Woodcock and J. Davis, Using Z: specification, refinement, and proof, Prentice Hall series in Computer Science, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chen, Y. (2000). How to Write a Healthiness Condition. In: Grieskamp, W., Santen, T., Stoddart, B. (eds) Integrated Formal Methods. IFM 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1945. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40911-4_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40911-4_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41196-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-40911-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics